View Full Version : I have a E620, want a new Macro lens please help

2nd August 2009, 04:12 PM
I have an E620 and I also have an Olympus Zuiko Digital 35mm 1:3.5 Macro lens.

Does any one know if I can get another macro lens, better then the one I have now.
I want to do very close up work, say want a close up of an Ant, my lens at the mo, is very good, but just want zoom in that close.

If anyone knows of a good one and how much they think it is, please let me know.
Also where is the best place to buy it.



2nd August 2009, 04:25 PM
Olympus zuiko digital 50mm Macro Lens would be your next step, I think they cost around 400 new at the moment;)

2nd August 2009, 04:27 PM
Thanks for the info, I'll have a look.

2nd August 2009, 04:35 PM
It depends what you mean by better - If you need 1:1 macro then the 35mm is about as good as it gets, the 50mm F2 macro buys you a little extra distance from your subject but at the cost of being only 1:2. The others worth looking at are the Sigma 105mm or 150mm macro lenses which will give you 1:1 at a greater working distance than either of the Olympus Macro lenses but are debateably not quite up to the same standard as the Zuikos.

2nd August 2009, 04:50 PM
Hi, I have enclosed a photo a took and as you can see, you can not see the bugs very good, is it the lens or me?

Jim Ford
2nd August 2009, 04:55 PM
Hi, I have enclosed a photo a took and as you can see, you can not see the bugs very good, is it the lens or me?

I would think it's you - the Zuiko 35mm is capable of very much better than that.


2nd August 2009, 05:05 PM
Hi, I have enclosed a photo a took and as you can see, you can not see the bugs very good, is it the lens or me?

Well something isn't right - it simply looks to be out of focus to me what might have caused that though is not so easy to determine. When it comes to very close up photos relying on autofocus is not the best idea and so my first step if that was my picture would be to set up a similar shot but use a tripod stop down the lens a little and manually focus using live view and 10x zoom, if the pictures all still come out the same then you have a faulty lens and should look at getting it replaced / repaired. If this is a severe crop (and the pixelated look to your image suggests it could possibly be you may be cropping out the sharp / focussed parts of the photo too?

The 35mm Macro is an extremely sharp lens - its only very slightly behind the 50mm F2 in that regard so you should be seeing much better photos than the above - providing the focus is spot on. I would be looking to pinpoint and solve the problems youre having with your 35mm before looking into buying a different macro lens as I'm not sure that will instantly cure the problem you're having.

2nd August 2009, 05:35 PM
Hi, I took it of auto, and this is what I got, I think it is me.
Thanks i'll save my money for something else.


Nick Temple-Fry
2nd August 2009, 05:44 PM
The 35mm is a fine macro lens, very sharp as has been said, however it does have certain characteristics that need to be managed (as do all lenses)

- the working distance for true macro is very close - basically you need the insect close to being able to write its name on the lens (OK - bit of an exageration)

- The dof in macro is quite shallow - so you may well want to be using f8-f14

- The lens isn't the faster (particularly closed down for dof) so to avoid movement/blur you need to drive with quite a high iso (shouldn't be a problem with the 620), or try to light the subject.

It's quite usable with af, though I'd recommend single point.

As this picture hasn't got the exif info it is difficult to say what is going on.

Hope you persevere with the lens and this helps.


2nd August 2009, 05:45 PM
Hi, I took it of auto, and this is what I got, I think it is me.
Thanks i'll save my money for something else.


That's certainly an improvement but it's still a long way short of what I would expect. What software are you using to re-size the pictures as really a 1000px x 700px needs to have a bigger file size than 79kb - personally I aim for the upper limit the gallery software here allows - 512kb to avoid nasty artifacts - and the pixellation you can see on your photos.

I think though you've demonstrated that there isn't a fault with the lens and it's a matter of being careful with the focus - as Nick suggests AF will usually be quite reliable (if the light is good enough - Normally a problem when it comes to getting very close) the single center AF point is a good idea - I never use anything else on my E510 / E410 so didn't think to mention that.

2nd August 2009, 05:53 PM
Hi, paul

I just used the olympus master 2 to copy the photo from the card to the computer and then postaged on here.

What sofware would be the best to use?

I have Adobe Lightroom 2.3 and Photoshop CS4, but always use the olympus master 2 to get the photos of the card.

2nd August 2009, 06:15 PM
Olympus Master should be more than good enough to resize your photos it appears to have only three quality settings when you re-size your image High, medium or low quality - I've just resized several photos to 1000px and saved at lowest quality and can't produce file sizes approaching 79kb the closest I can get is 200kb and it lacks any of the pixellation you can see with your examples (but shows jpeg artifacts aroound the high contrast edges) - see below. I'm not really sure what's going with your photos to get that small a file size...

http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/data/500/P9030477.jpg (http://e-group.uk.net/gallery/showphoto.php/photo/16821)

Taken with E410 + 35mm Macro.

If you have photoshop then I would at least try using that to resize your photos saving them with a quality of 9 or 10 should make them small enough to be uploaded here but should be more then enough quality to avoid artifacts and pixellation...

7th August 2009, 11:06 AM
1:1 is the best you can get with the ZD35mm, Sigma 105 and Sigma 150. You want closer than that, you will have to add an extension tube. I am not sure if the EX25 will work with the listed lenses but with the ZD50, you get 1:1

This is taken with the Sigma 105
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2240/2167451747_377f38411c.jpg (http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2240/2167451747_377f38411c_b.jpg)

and this with the Sigma 150
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2422/3715297908_328ec958da.jpg (http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2422/3715297908_328ec958da_b.jpg)

The difference is the working distant as mentioned, the 35mm, you most likely be poking the subject to get 1:1 magnification.

To my opinion, I would prefer the 105 to that 150 as it would be easier to hand hold and less bulky. For instance, this tiny spider in the red circle.


I had such a hard time trying to shoot it with the 150mm
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3582/3691971965_76ff1de012.jpg (http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3582/3691971965_76ff1de012_b.jpg)

And to catch it with the 105 was such a breeze.
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3655/3691974513_eb6812cee2.jpg (http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3655/3691974513_4023651c8b_o.jpg)

Please click the images for a bigger view.